Authority and Identity
Differentiating identity and authority is integral when writing. In Elizabeth Wardle’s article, Alan, a newcomer to the workforce, finds it difficult to connect with his staff, establish authority, and find his identity. However, before we dive into the schadenfreude that is Alan’s job struggles described by Wardle, we should seek the differences between the two terms. As Wardle best simplifies authority, “Authority is bestowed by institutions, can be just as easily withdrawn by those same institutions or its members, and must be maintained through appropriate expressions of authority.” Authority can practically be handed to an individual joining a Discourse– how they act/perform can have others question their authority or, worse scenario, strip them of their authoritative rights. Of course, other things play a significant role in establishing authority, but we will come back to this later. Conversely, “identity is dynamic, and it is something that is presented and re-presented, constructed and reconstructed…” (Hecht, 1993). Newcomers must find ways to integrate their identities into the workplace, as noted in this respective manner, constructing it properly to fit with the community. Identity should be dynamic, so individuals must learn to alter them within communities.
Wenger’s Insight
Wardle adds the insight of sociologist Etienne Wenger, who believes that there are three key ways of developing belonging: engagement, imagination, and alignment. Neophytes in a new Discourse community should find ways to meet these steps. These steps, as Wenger summarizes, can help them find their identity in a community, which, in theory, can help individuals understand better where they stand (authority). Individuals must find ways to interact and alter their styles, if need be, to be compatible within a community. Indeed, this is easier said than done, as not many people are accustomed to reconstructing their identities to fit with others– that, in this case, can be beliefs, ethics, or styles (written or any form of style). If individuals cannot identify well within the community, it leads them to be marginalized, which is certainly not a positive in the worksite– To mention the truism, it will only make it difficult to find their identity in the DC or build authority if they are marginalized.
Alan and his Unfortunate Mishaps
Alan is a 23-year-old white male who recently received a B.A. in art and design from a large Midwestern university. In his years at university, he developed a strong interest in computers and worked jobs regarding skills typically aligned with computer skills, so after his degree completion, he was awarded a position at his university as a computer support specialist. Alan’s expertise to handle well with computer technology granted him authority when he landed the job. Unfortunately, he loses that authority shortly when the staff cannot configure well with him (identity wise- if you will). The staff members relegated Alan from his authoritative strips when he basically could not communicate well with his team members via email. He could not write an email to the standards the staff wanted, but he never realized any issues with his written style. His identity caused him to be myopic, which, as noted above in the earlier section, caused him to be marginalized in the Discourse community. So, long story short, Alan had trouble finding himself, even though he felt superior to his worker, and vice versa. The workers had trouble understanding Alan.
I cannot quite conform to the idea that Alan was at fault for his inadequate performance at this job or if it is reasonable to blame the staff for not aligning well with Alan. I wish to say both– However, if there were one right answer, it would be correct to blame Alan, at least according to this article. Alan would be at fault if we used the Swales article, too. (Check out my previous blog for context.) Alan’s identity was not dynamic. He was unable to reconstruct or alter his identity to fit well with his DC. And, if we follow Wenger’s three modes of belonging, we can easily note that Align failed all three categories: He could not align with his staff, and he was not engaging within the community. Lastly, his imagination was skewed– perhaps too imaginative, which could have caused him to be disconnected and lose reality. Again, these criteria are difficult to access by individuals, so Alan was not aware of how to genuinely interact/communicate with his members. Or, perhaps, he attempted, but his staff, who perceived him as a ‘tool,’ could not see his intent. But, this felt double-edged, and it seemed like a poor predicament for the alumni, no matter which way you perceive it. His authority, which was awarded to him when he was hired and lost soon after, was his fault. He lost that authority because he did not understand his identity (and his double-negative sentences).
Leave a Reply